**Trending Video** Police Shoot Man's Dog

This was the City of Hawthorne police department, not the LAPD.

 

So I guess none of them had OC spray? Or tasers? Sure this guy was not being a model citizen in this case, but his dog didn't truly need to be killed. On the other hand, it was a big dog. He could have been the nicest in the world. However, if he ran and bit anyone the police would be getting flak for that too. Nobody wins here. Truly.

 

thank you. i was assuming all the comments tying it to LAPD, and/or LA were correct, so if i got that wrong then the part you bolded from my statement wouldn't really hold weight in this scenario...

 

Sorry didn't read all 25 pages of this thread so may be repeat of someone else comments but my 2cents. Guy was being a moron. He is to blame for the dog's death. It's sad because the dog was only doing what he/she was supposed to and that is to protect the owner. The dog doesn't know the police are the good guys and his/her owner is a dipshit.
As far as the police shooting the dog. Apparently it happens a lot but this situation happened to be caught on camera. If my dog went after an officer and got shot, I would be devastated because he's like my furry son. But I would understand that the police need to protect themselves. I don't expect them to take a bite while waiting for pepper spray to work. Dog owners need to be more responsible. That suspect should have been shot instead.
Another thing, what is so interesting there that everyone has to have their phone cameras on? That seems absolutely retarded to me. I've got better things to do than stand on a street corner like a ghetto rat filming the cops waiting for something to happen.

 

...why, as you say, should the "suspect" have been shot instead?... what did he do to warrant such forceful response? why the broad-brushed negative connotation w/ regard to filming of police?...

 

End statement, Cop felt threaten. Case closed

 

Yea... As its been said before, it's real easy to Monday morning quarterback these situations...

It's especially easy to do so when most of the people who do it have little-to-no idea how these sort of situations are handled in the real world, at the time of the incident.

The guy was objectively breaking the law, and was arressted... Prior to being detained, he attempted to secure his dog, that attempt was unsuccessful, as we see in the video. Because his attempt was unsuccessful, the dog became a threat. The threat was eliminated using reasonable force for the situation at hand.

The standard by which "reasonable" is determined, is if other officers or equally trained person(s) were placed in the same situation, would they react in a similar fashion, and is the action warranted and allowable within the protocols and policy of the organization.

It is absolutely within police protocols to eliminate an immediate threat to officer or civilian life or safety. Regardless of the variables and circumstances, if at the moment (not 5 minutes before or after), the officer reasonably believes that the safey of themselves, their coworkers, or civilians, is being threatened, at that exact moment, it is justifiable.

They tried to subdue the dog by getting the leash, which was a courtesy that they didnt neccesarily need to give... They probably would have been justified shooting that dog the second it left the car and charged them the way it did.

An 80 lb rottwiler that's been acting aggressively towards you suddenly gets loose... Say.. While you're maybe walking with your 2 year old child on the street... It is charging you... Are you really going to give the animal the benefit of the doubt, or are you going to eliminate the threat?

The only GUARANTEED way that this situation could have ended with the dog safe, no cops injured, and no arrest for the dog owner, is if he had avoided putting himself in the position he did by breaking the law. Period.


Cliffs: owner breaks law, dog becomes threat to officers, officers eliminate threat.

 

Maybe I have a jaded view on these street hoodlums based on the neighborhood I live in. My apologies if I offended you. I am older and pretty conservative. My thought is the dog was only doing what he thought was right and is the true victim in this sad situation. I don't mean the "suspect" should have been literally shot, but if I had a choice between that sorry excuse for a human being and an innocent dog, I would pick the dog.
In regards to filming the police, I guess that's the new thing with society. I find it asinine to sit on a street corner filming nothing. I guess if you don't have a job and have run out of weed or finished your "40", there's nothing else better to do. Let the police and fire guys do their job. I don't understand the fascination.

 

...i think most everyone agrees the dog was doing what it thought to be right, ...and most any dog would try to come to the aid of it's friend/owner... i think that is why a lot of folks are emotional about it..

i'm just hesitant to put all the blame for the dog getting shot on the owner, w/out knowing some details about what happened... the guy did try to isolate the dog from the situation as the police were moving in on him, ...i don't think it would've been prudent to try and put the windows up, etc under the circumstances, ...trying to reach into the car, especially the driver's side to turn a key (power windows) could've made things worse for him...

as for filming police, ...that's widespread these days, in all parts of the country, ...it is an effective tool for citizens to curtail abuse of power/authority, ..which can and does happen at times...

 

But the guy caused the commotion that drew police attention. If he had complied with the police request to move to where others were filming and stop making a distraction to the active crime scene- No need to secure the dog at all.

And since we all agree that the dog was gong to be upset by the detention of the owner and the owner seemed to knew he was going to be cuffed...A half assed attempt to "secure" the dog was irresponsible.

 

I wonder what the percentage is of people that hate cops to people that break the law?...

 

the broad-brush disparaging comments that some have levied here against LEOs are uncalled for... i would also say this about disparaging remarks levied against the owner, or people filming police, etc. as well.. a lot of emotional rushing to judgement going on... the video in the OP is not contiguous/uncut, so parts of what happened are missing (maybe there's other versions out there on the web now???)

 

been going to college to become a cop for a while now and taking many Administrative Justice classes along with intern programs and in the last few months decided that being a cop is not a good idea there are too many like the ones in this video

 

The dog sensed his owner was in danger and wanted to make sure he was safe! (Good dog)...what was the officer thinking? Trying to grab the leash of a stressed dog when you're a stranger!? BAD IDEA...

Now the dog DID lunge at the officer but only when he tried to grab the leash...the dog was scared and stressed because of the situation and he thought his owner was in trouble...

The officer should have tazed the dog, NOT shot it

 

I'm a damn fool to weigh in on this thread.

Not one person reading it is going to have their mind changed by anything I or any other poster writes.

But I'll stand up for the cop who did the shooting.

1. He comes over to the assistance of his teammates in a situation that develops in less than ten seconds.

2. He interposes himself between a large dog and his teammates who are busy with a detainee. I make no judgement about whether they were right or wrong to detain the dog owner in the first place.

3. He tries to gain control of the dog without shooting it. I see him twice refrain from shooting in a five second interval. I know Chris thinks that he provokes the dog by trying to get its leash. But the situation is volatile and a large powerful dog owned by a man who's being detained needs to be controlled. I think even Cesar Millan would agree.

4. He doesn't shoot the dog to control it. He only shoots when it finally lunges at him.

Sad.

 

But it was his fault BJ...he could've handled the situation better! Why not taze it?

 

As an officer! Lethal force should ALWAYS be the last resort! (Man or beast) If he can't handle this situation than maybe he shouldn't be a LEO....

I'm all for my LEO's being safe! I commend them for their services!

 

I had to think about it. I googled up "taser use on dogs" and read the page that taser themselves wrote about it.

http://blog.taser.com/tasers-on-dogs/

I think it comes down to margin for error. In their taser-on-dog success story, there's time. The dog is the primary threat. they don't need to get close to it, and there's a margin of safety in the event that the taser doesn't work.

In this situation, there's little time, the primary threat, whatever it is, is in the building across the street - the secondary threat is the owner, and the dog is just feet away. So if the (one shot) taser doesn't work - there's no time for a backup plan.

 

I hear ya, but man...it's just a f'd up situation all around...

 

Definitely see both sides of this. The only point I want to bring to the argument is what this video brings to the issue. I think technically the officer was in the right to shoot the dog, but I think it would have been handled a lot better if he hadn't shot the dog. The media in this country is going to blow up onto the police officer. Look at Trevon Martin, the media made him out to be this sweet little kid and Zimmerman's life was legitimately in danger because of the media. After months the truth comes out that Trevon was not a good person and beat the shit out of Zimmerman before he shot him.

I will bet that although technically a correct action given the situation it will end poorly for the officer involved. I have two uncles and a cousin who are police officers and know that officers are faced with tough decisions all the time.

I hate the way the media blows up everything in this country with insufficient/incorrect information.